Flight 93 Never Crashed In The Empty Shanksville Field

[Terral]

Greetings to All:

Flight 93 never crashed in the empty field outside Shanksville, Pennsylvania on 9/11 or any other day. You are bearing witness to one of the greatest hoaxes ever perpetuated on the masses in United States history. Try to find just one picture of Flight 93 crashed anywhere to realize NONE even exist. We begin by putting "Flight 93" into your AltaVista search engine to find this at Wikipedia.org

Wikipedia.org Website:

Carefully inspect the area inside and outside the impact crater where we can see a man in a dark shirt and light pants walking to our left. You can see the time is around high noon by the shadow gathered directly under his feet. The obvious problem for the Official Cover Story LIE is that nothing even remotely similar to a real 100-Ton Jetliner (pic) appears anywhere in the frame. I encourage everyone here to flip through all the pictures on the Flight 93 Website (here) in search of a crashed 100-Ton Jetliner. In fact, search the internet high and low for a single picture of Flight 93 crashed ANYWHERE. Good Luck. :0)

This picture shows grass growing down all the incline depressions created LONG before these 9/11 attacks. This picture (pic) shows the depression in the same field taken via satellite on April 20, 1994!! The only difference is that someone took the time and effort to create an explosion in this depression to then dump a huge pile of garbage and set everything on fire:

Note very carefully that our photographer is kneeling down to get a shot of the unburned grass in the same frame with the burned garbage. We can see that the garbage pile did not burn for very long by the fire line created along the outer debris pile edges and the unburned grass running all the way down to the bottom of the hole. You can look over at the little fire truck to realize our photographer's camera is on the same horizontal plane as the hood of the vehicle, which means this empty hole cannot possibly be more than just four feet deep! Supporting testimony from the LetsRoll911.org website says,

LetsRool911.org Website:

Notice the vegetation and grass which has overgrown the crash imprint already! This is what most might assume are the wingtips and the tail fin imprinted onto the ground. Yet they are completely over-grown with grass! And grass and vegetation is also seen growing on the sides of the burning pit walls! This must be some kind of new Sunni Muslim Prairie Grass, which is able to grow back in minutes! This shows that a large portion of the imprint of what we were told was Flight 93, was made long before 911! And that the owner of this property is a key witness, and a probable player into what really happened on 911! This crash site was pre-made, and shows no wreckage, nor burning jet fuel. Two staples of every airplane crash before 911! The owner of this property is one of the players in 911!

Let this little video (link) replay over and over again and look carefully across the grassy depressions on either side of the smoldering garbage pile to realize there is no 100-Ton Jetliner crashed anywhere. At this point, many readers are willing to acknowledge that Flight 93 never crashed into this empty field, but they want to ask “Okay, so what really happened???” I am glad you asked: :0)

What Really Happened:

Flight 93:

Proof of 9/11 Lies by the US Government and Media

An article detailing Flight 93's last minutes was briefly available at dailynews.yahoo.com on 9/11/2001. It [does] not fit the official story of the last moments of Flight 93 and rapidly disappeared from news websites, but it can still be found at the web archive: It was reported that a missile was heard before the crash: Debris fell from Flight 93 nearly six miles from the crash scene . . . human remains were found miles from the crash scene . . . light debris was found eight miles from the crash scene . . . and the following footage proves Flight 93 did not crash in a single piece but came apart in midair and scattered over a wide area . . .

Must see rare footage = FOX / NBC News Report.

The military refused to rule out a shoot down on September 15, 2001... ...and the Washington Envoy to Canada says Bush ordered a shoot down . . . What else is the government concealing about 9/11?

All the reporters see is a large hole in the ground. Period! The hole is estimated to be 20 feet long and 10 to 15 feet wide, when a real 100-Ton Jetliner (pic) is 155 feet long and 125 feet wide and weighs in at a whopping 100 Tons (real pic and another = the schematic)! Here are some pictures of real Jetliner crash sites (pics + pic + pic) with others showing massive 6-ton engines (pic and pic) separated from the fuselage. Simply compare the debris in those images to more pictures of taken on 9/11 for this Flight 93 case:

The image of the man standing with his hands folded behind his back says it all! Note that practically everyone else has his face looking ‘away’ from the little hole, because there are obviously NO signs of any 100-Ton Jetliner. Then note the yellow tape on the ground right behind him, which divides the Official Crime Scene (the hole side) from a clean field with no debris just a yard or so behind the man’s feet. The Official Bushie Cover Story says this happened (pic), when we can clearly see no signs of any 100-Ton Jetliner at all.

What we need is some hard evidence for WHY some people continue to believe Flight 93 crashed into this empty field outside Shanksville, Pennsylvania, besides “Because Senor Bushie told me so . . .”. Can anyone here show us just one picture of a real 100-Ton Jetliner crashed in this empty field? No! We have already seen nothing more than an empty hole. Todd, James and their Official Cover Story cohorts are invited to make their “Flight 93 Crashed Here” case using whatever they call ‘credible evidence.’ This side of the debate is not holding his breath. :0)

In Christ Jesus,

Terral

 

[Vylo]

There are plenty of pictures of this on the internet.

It is advisable to read the wiki page you link to:

Karl Landis, who was driving nearby, saw the plane as it "rolled slightly to the left and appeared to hit the ground at almost a 90-degree angle."[58] Another witness, Eric Peterson, who was at a nearby auto shop, looked up when he heard the plane, "It was low enough, I thought you could probably count the rivets. You could see more of the roof of the plane than you could the belly. It was on its side. There was a great explosion and you could see the flames. It was a massive, massive explosion. Flames and then smoke and then a massive, massive mushroom cloud."[59]

The aircraft impacted at approximately 563 mph (906 km/h), at a 40 degree angle

Most plane wrecks, the planes aren't approaching at a steep angle. They also might burn, but don't generally explode so forcefully, that probably broke up the majority of the plane pretty well, you can see debris scattered about in the photographs.

 

[MachZer0]

How about this photo

Or this one

 

[invisible trousers]

the cake is a lie

 

[Terral]

Hi Vylo:

There are plenty of pictures of this on the internet.

Really? Where? This is where Vylo is supposed to be hauling out his pictures. :0)

It is advisable to read the wiki page you link to:

It is advisable that Vylo begin showing us his pictures of Flight 93 crashed ANYWHERE. Good Luck . . .

Most plane wrecks, the planes aren't approaching at a steep angle.

So what? This is where my distinguished debating opponent simply ignores most everything in the Opening Post to begin ‘talking’ about what he thinks concerning ‘most 100-Ton Jetliner crash sites.’ This is the expert's video for the Pentagon case showing how a real Jetliner crashes (the pictures):

Pentagon Experts Video

Real Jetliner crashes leave real Jetliner Debris Fields no matter the angel or rate of descent. Here is my challenge to Vylo and everyone here: Show us ‘your’ pictures of real Jetliner crash sites ‘and’ make your comparisons to the empty hole images we see for this Shanksville case like the Wiki image atop the Opening Post. Good Luck . . .

Here is a revelation for many members and readers seeing these things laid out this way for the very first time: The four Jetliners (Flights 11, 77, 93 and 175) have literally hundreds of ‘time-change’ parts (Colonel George Nelson’s story) with serial numbers “married to the aircraft registration numbers in the aircraft records and the plans and scheduling section will notify maintenance specialists when the parts must be replaced.” This means Crime Scene Investigators can accurately match time-change part serial numbers to the right Jetliner within minutes of the initial cool down period. However, the Bushie Administration has FAILED to produce a single time-change part or any serial numbers to prove they even have ANY of these Jetliners in their possession. :0) If the Government Cover Story is indeed ‘the truth,’ then where are the hundreds of time-change parts supporting their case? The fact is that Senor Bush and the FBI assumed jurisdiction over these 9/11 crime scenes using mere accusations that real Jetliners Crashed Here! Vylo is ‘talking’ about pictures of Flight 93 crashed in this empty Shanksville field that NEVER existed . . .

They also might burn, but don't generally explode so forcefully, that probably broke up the majority of the plane pretty well, you can see debris scattered about in the photographs.

Are we posting jokes to these threads today or what? :0) Sending us commentary on what ‘might burn’ and ‘don’t generally explode’ (heh) that ‘probably broke up’ (lol) has nothing to do with ANYTHING. If you have plenty of pictures showing Flight 93 crashed in this empty field (none exist), then by all means post those images ASAP! I will bet that you can find pictures of Santa Claus cracking the whip on Rudolph, Dancer and Comet with more basis in reality than a crashed Flight 93 . . .

We are talking about a missing 100-Ton Jetliner with two 6-Ton engines (like this and this) and over 60 tons of high-grade aluminum/titanium in the massive frame alone. Then we are talking about missing wing sections, landing gear (pic), seats (count them), cargo, massive tail section (like this) bodies and the whole nine yards . . .

And you want to cram all of that into a little tiny 20-feet diameter hole no more than 4 feet deep. :0)

GL,

Terral

 

[Terral]

Hi MachZero:

How about this photo

Or this one

You are still missing about 100 tons of evidence. Senor Bushie planted this bit of engine debris as evidence too (pic), but the thing mysteriously appears from under the unburned grass. :0)

All of the ‘planted’ FBI evidence can easily fit into the back of a single pickup truck. This is definitely an ‘Inside Job:

Vietnam Pilot Testimony

Remember? :0)

GL,

Terral

 

[Gremlins]

With most planes, when they crash the pilots try to do it as much like a normal landing as possible, so that the undercarriage absorbs most of the impact and the passangers/pilots have a greater chance of survival. A 40 degree angle would basically be equivalent to the plane slamming into a mountainside. I don't think there'd be much identifiable wreckage left.

So, Terral, what do you think happened to flight 93 really? Why would the authorities lie about it? Why, if they're so sinister, was the coverup attempt so pathetic?

 

[MachZer0]

Hi MachZero:



You are still missing about 100 tons of evidence. Senor Bushie planted this bit of engine debris as evidence too (pic), but the thing mysteriously appears from under the unburned grass. :0)

All of the ‘planted’ FBI evidence can easily fit into the back of a single pickup truck. This is definitely an ‘Inside Job:

Vietnam Pilot Testimony

Remember? :0)

GL,

Terral

I see. There just happened to be a couple of big pieces of airplane parts lying around. The same thing you see just about everywhere you go.

 

[Aerika]

Greetings to All:

Flight 93 never crashed in the empty field outside Shanksville, Pennsylvania on 9/11 or any other day. You are bearing witness to one of the greatest hoaxes ever perpetuated on the masses in United States history.

I implore you to consider the families of the Victems. Any credible conspiracy theory should make an effort to validate or invalidate the victems.



http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20011028flt93mainstoryp7.asp

The Crew​

Jason Dahl


LeRoy Homer, Jr.



Lorraine Bay


Sandra Bradshaw



Cee Cee Lyles
[URL="http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20011028flt93greenbiop8.asp"]Wanda Green[/URL]


Deborah Anne Jacobs Welsh

The Passengers​

Christian Adams


Todd Beamer



Alan Beaven


Mark Bingham



Deora Bodley


Marion Britton



Thomas E. Burnett Jr.


Willam Cashman



Georgine Rose Corrigan


Patricia Cushing



Joseph DeLuca


Patrick "Joe" Driscoll



Edward Porter Felt


Jane Folger



Colleen L. Fraser


Andrew Garcia



Jeremy Glick


Lauren Grandcolas



Donald F. Greene


Linda Gronlund



Richard Guadagno


Toshiya Kuge



Hilda Marcin


Waleska Martinez



Nicole Miller


Louis J. Nacke II



Donald and Jean Peterson


Mark "Mickey" Rothenberg



Christine Snyder


John Talignani

Honor Elizabeth Wainio
Kristin Gould White

 

[Vylo]

Coming off snotty isn't going to get you anywhere.

Mach already threw up 2 pictures. Perhaps you aren't getting what happens when a large chunk of machinery primarily made of aluminum carrying several thousand gallons of jet fuel crashes at a 40 degree angle at over 3/4 the speed of sound. It breaks up quite a bit, it explodes, it burns, it melts.

 

[Terral]

Hi Aerika:

I implore you to consider the families of the Victims. Any credible conspiracy theory should make an effort to validate or invalidate the victims.

This is an Official Cover Story ‘ploy’ and nothing more. Before you start going around passing out ‘guilt’ to anyone, then begin by showing us ‘your’ pictures of Flight 93 crashed ANYWHERE. Head back up to the Opening Post and ‘quote >>’ anything at all that seems out of place or DEAD WRONG to ‘then’ grace us with your evidence proving that Flight 93 Crashed Here. The fact that MANY people have been duped into swallowing the Official Cover Story will never produce a single picture of Flight 93 crashed anywhere. Period. Please check the Topic Title again and please try to write for or against the OP hypothesis one way or the other. Otherwise, you are attempting to hijack the Topic to VictimVille . . .

We agree that MANY people died in this Flight 93 Case, but NOT the way Senor Bush and the FBI have told We The People from the very beginning. Eventual closure, freedom and liberty will come with acceptance of 'the 911Truth' rather than the current deception hidden behind Bush Administration LIES . . .

In Christ Jesus,

Terral

 

[Vylo]

Here's a picture from a russian plane crash, not the lack of large debris (only one piece near the top)

 

[Douger]

Having close up photos of single pieces of wreckage isn't exactly proof, and actually makes it look staged.

I'm not convinced either way. There is of course the question of what happened to all those people if the plane didn't crash.
That's kind of hard to explain.

 

[Vylo]

Having close up photos of single pieces of wreckage isn't exactly proof, and actually makes it look staged.

I'm not convinced either way. There is of course the question of what happened to all those people if the plane didn't crash.
That's kind of hard to explain.

They took the red pill of course .

 

[Terral]

Hi Vylo with Mach mentioned:

Coming off snotty isn't going to get you anywhere.

Please do not confuse 100 percent confidence in these 911Truth Debates with ‘coming off snotty,’ simply because we sit on opposite side of this discussion and you have no case. Then realize I have FAR more information on this Flight 93 Case than appears in the OP of this thread. This particular debate has a very simple hypothesis that “Flight 93 ‘NEVER’ Crashed In The Empty Shanksville Field.”

Mach already threw up 2 pictures.

Mach is still 100 tons short of showing us his crashed Jetliner. :0) I agree with his ‘evidence’ that the Bush Administration took the time to plant a bit of debris . . .We will see the very same kind of thing (not exactly) in the Pentagon case . . .

Perhaps you aren't getting what happens when a large chunk of machinery primarily made of aluminum carrying several thousand gallons of jet fuel crashes at a 40 degree angle at over 3/4 the speed of sound. It breaks up quite a bit, it explodes, it burns, it melts.

None of that ‘talk’ means anything. ZERO. Just show us your pictures of Flight 93 crashed anywhere. We are still talking about a real 100-Ton Jetliner (watch the 1 minute video)! :0)

757 Landing Tegucigalpa

Good Luck . . .

In Christ Jesus,

Terral

 

[Morcova]

It must have been the reptile people.

 

[Vylo]

Mach is still 100 tons short of showing us his crashed Jetliner

Wow, please tell me you aren't serious. All of your "evidence" means squat if you don't understand basic physics. You aren't goint to get 100 tons of large wreckage out of an event like that.

of that ‘talk’ means anything. ZERO. Just show us your pictures of Flight 93 crashed anywhere. We are still talking about a real 100-Ton Jetliner (watch the 1 minute video)! :0)

That video means zero. It shows a 757 landing normally. Note that in most crashes that is close to the angle of approach a plane takes, but at higher speed.

Flight 93 hit at over 500 MPH in a deliberate 40 Degree dive. Do you understand the difference, or do we need diagrams to show you what a 40 degree approach would look like compared to that video?

Before you start posting things like this, at least try to know something about the subject at hand. Just the basics.

 

[MachZer0]

Having close up photos of single pieces of wreckage isn't exactly proof, and actually makes it look staged.

I'm not convinced either way. There is of course the question of what happened to all those people if the plane didn't crash.
That's kind of hard to explain.

The plane, actually, was flown directly to Roswell. the passengers, after a short trip to Syria, were taken to Gitmo where they are routinely waterboarded

 

[Archaeopteryx]

The plane, actually, was flown directly to Roswell. the passengers, after a short trip to Syria, were taken to Gitmo where they are routinely waterboarded

Those who have the audacity to question the truth of a well-accepted myth - a myth that functions as “orienting and mobilizing story for a people”, are quite often the subject of ridicule and accusations of blasphemy. Similarly, those who have the audacity to question the official conspiracy theory of 9/11 and call others to critically examine their own perceptions, are also either ignored, laughed at, or ridiculed as lunatic ‘tin-foil hatters’ and unpatriotic, anti-American conspiracy nuts - blasphemous traitors even. What crime have they committed to merit such an accusation of blasphemy? Simply questioning the orthodoxy of the widely-held faith. David Ray Griffin perhaps puts it best when he writes, “If some people have the bad taste to raise the question of the truth of the sacred story, the keepers of the faith do not enter into debate with them. They ignore them, or denounce them as blasphemers.”


Think, however, of all the other apparent ‘blasphemers’ and ‘heretics’, who while proposing ideas that ran counter to popular and widely-held beliefs, turned out to be true. They too were at first ignored, then laughed at and ridiculed, even publicaly shamed for asking questions and seeking the truth. Case in point, Galileo Galilei, who advocated the theory of heliocentrism which held the central thesis that Earth revolved around the sun. This theory, which Galileo advocated, ran contrary to the popular and widely held geocentric theory, which contended that the Earth was the center of the Universe. Galileo was ridiculed by many for holding such a belief, even called to stand trial under suspicion of heresy. Several centuries later, evidence appears to suggest that the vastly unpopular theory which Galileo advocated, is true. Martin Luther King, Jr too, who advocated for an end to segregation and racial discrimination proposed ideas that ran contrary to popular belief. For challenging popular myths and societal beliefs, King was ridiculed by many. No doubt that at the time many thought of him as a traitor as well and denounced him as a heretic. Charles Darwin too, who publicized the theory of evolution via natural selection in The Origin of the Species, is still criticized to this very day for having advocated an apparently “irrational” theory. If Darwin had advocated such a theory in the medieval era, he surely would have been denounced as a heretic by the Inquisition. Joan of Arc also was convicted of heresy and burnt at the stake in Rouen as a result of a politically motivated trial, despite there having no guilt been found as a later review would attest.


Labeling someone as a ‘heretic’ or a ‘traitor’ or denouncing them as a blasphemer is a strategy of ridicule that has been used since ancient days where anyone who expressed a view that was not necessarily popular was merely denounced for blasphemy regardless of any truth to be found in their assertions. Such labels, appeals to stereotypes, accusations of heresy and ridicule are thus limited in that they lack substance and reason and merely serve as convenient distraction.

 

[Aerika]

The plane, actually, was flown directly to Roswell. the passengers, after a short trip to Syria, were taken to Gitmo where they are routinely waterboarded

I thought it was hilarious and in all fairness, at least he has a theory to their whereabouts .